After this week’s chemical attacks in Syria, I decided to blog on our current U.S. position as it might compare to President Obama’s “red line” decision in 2012. During my research, I came across Derek Chollet’s 2016 article, “Obama’s Red Line, Revisited.” At that time, Mr. Chollet was the Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs under President Obama. His article resonates today and possesses merit on President Obama’s handling of Syria’s chemical attacks in 2013.

But for reasons that are markedly different than what the Assistant Secretary surmised.

Radical Islamic terrorism is an ideology. It is a belief in an idea. And it is an identity to that idea. By adding the label “Radical Islamic” to terrorism, we change the way we think of it, how we fight it and more importantly who is responsible. Radical Islam is not new and over the centuries prompted everything from military campaigns (Crusades, Ottomans, etc.) to insurgencies (Algiers, Iraq, etc.), to today’s terrorism (Paris, Brussels, San Bernardino, etc.). And with the creation of radical groups like Al Queda and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), its popularity is rising and its reach is global.

And to make matters worse, the U.S. over the last few decades has spent blood and treasure trying to defeat it with little success; no matter whose been in charge. Every time we cut off the head of this snake another one grows. It almost appears as if it is invincible. Why does it appear this way and what is the problem with defeating it?

The answer is right in front of our nose but few have the courage to see it and even fewer have the courage to tackle it.

It is so rare that the election of a political leader in one country should have consequences that change another. But what we have seen with Donald Trump’s victory is a shockwave which has awoken a sleeping giant of conservativism. And along with it, a resurgence of sovereign traditions. Feeding off of a Trump victory, surging French presidential candidate Marine Le Pen has erased a double-digit lead from embattled establishment conservative François Fillon and three other liberal candidates. She is now on top of the polls and with her conservative popularity growing, could be a significant change for France. But don’t expect it to stop here. Its effect will be felt across Europe and possibly the world?

Congressional members are publicly stating President Trump is not legitimate. Former President Obama supports mass protests, and mainstream media is in an outright battle with the Presidency. It has been two months since Donald Trump was sworn in as our 45th President. Members of Congress, political pundits, and major media outlets have been relentless in impeding or slowing down cabinet nominations, encouraging dissent, challenging executive orders and promoting conspiracies. Every presidential nomination, every executive order, every White House action is examined through a lens of negativity and disruption. At the same time, the president himself is not absent of fault. Tweeting on issues before all the facts are available, condemning large swaths of the media as dishonest and fake, and poor communication and execution of executive orders.

All of this has created a hostile atmosphere with little objectivity or popularity. It is an unfortunate state of affairs, and these actions to many American’s are shameful and irritating. But at some point, someone must lead. And who that is should not up for debate.

Featured Posts

This is a redo of a previous blog I wrote about the security issues inside Afghanistan. I initially used personal accounts to paint a picture of the problems I witnessed during my military tour in 2005. However, with President Trump’s most recent speech laying out a potential shift in American Afghan policy, I felt compelled to […]